Hi,
I also found this to be the case as I rebalanced the root filesystem of my
Debian installation on this ThinkPad T520 on an Intel SSD 320.
Same here, I ran balance on kernel-3.12 some time ago and after
balancing performance dropped noticeable and stayed there.
When booting natively I can
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 01:25:42PM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
(I have a btrfsck running, looks like it may take over an hour, so I'll post
that after it's finished)
I ran out of patience after 18 hours of waiting since it seemed to have not
progressed after 12 hours (it was still doing stuff,
On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 07:57:00AM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
On Sat, Apr 12, 2014 at 01:25:42PM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
(I have a btrfsck running, looks like it may take over an hour, so I'll post
that after it's finished)
I ran out of patience after 18 hours of waiting since it seemed
Dear all,
unfortunately, I am very very deperate and I highly appreciate any help.
One week ago, I move my entire system to btrfs to setup a RAID1. I
created the RAID between device /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc with no
partition table on normal HDDs. Everything was working smoothly until
my computer
Clemens Eisserer posted on Sun, 13 Apr 2014 10:16:22 -0400 as excerpted:
I also found this to be the case as I rebalanced the root filesystem of
my Debian installation on this ThinkPad T520 on an Intel SSD 320.
Same here, I ran balance on kernel-3.12 some time ago and after
balancing
Maximilian Bräutigam posted on Sun, 13 Apr 2014 22:18:21 +0200 as
excerpted:
unfortunately, I am very very deperate and I highly appreciate any help.
One week ago, I move my entire system to btrfs to setup a RAID1. I
created the RAID between device /dev/sdb and /dev/sdc with no partition
end_pos = round_up(pos + iov-iov_len, root-sectorsize);
added in commit 3ac0d7b96a268a98bd474cab8bce3a9f125aaccf
Author: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
Date: Thu Mar 27 02:51:58 2014 +
btrfs: Change the expanding write sequence to fix snapshot related bug.
doesn't
Hi folks,
The xfstests repository at git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/cmds/xfstests has
just been updated. Patches often get missed, so please check if your
outstanding patches were in this update. If they have not been in
this update, please resubmit them to x...@oss.sgi.com so they can be
picked up in the
Thanks for fixing the problems.
Qu
Original Message
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] btrfs-progs: Add device management related
paragraph.
From: David Sterba dste...@suse.cz
To: Liu Bo bo.li@oracle.com
Date: 2014年04月12日 01:34
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 05:16:22PM +0800, Liu Bo
Original Message
Subject: Re: [PATCH 1/2] btrfs-progs: Add device management related
paragraph.
From: Marc MERLIN m...@merlins.org
To: dste...@suse.cz, Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com,
linux-btrfs@vger.kernel.org
Date: 2014年04月12日 01:52
On Fri, Apr 11, 2014 at 07:36:28PM
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 10:49:38AM +1000, Dave Chinner wrote:
Hi folks,
The xfstests repository at git://oss.sgi.com/xfs/cmds/xfstests has
just been updated. Patches often get missed, so please check if your
outstanding patches were in this update. If they have not been in
this update,
On Sun, Apr 13, 2014 at 04:02:36AM +, Duncan wrote:
What happens if you simply mount it ro, without the recovery option? Is
it still normal-speed or is that slow as a rw mount?
I just tried in ro without recovery, and I could copy data out at 52MB/s
for a big file, so that's quite good.
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 09:16:44AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Generally, would you agree to putting more links to the wiki in man pages
since man pages are not forever but sure take a long time to update on the
installed based and the wiki can be up to date for everyone right away?
(I'm not
Original Message
Subject: Re: wiki vs man pages
From: Marc MERLIN m...@merlins.org
To: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
Date: 2014年04月14日 09:45
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 09:16:44AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Generally, would you agree to putting more links to the wiki in man
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 06:49:56PM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
I had a tree with some amount of thousand files (less than 1 million)
on top of md raid5.
It took 18H to rm it in 3 tries:
gargamel:/mnt/dshelf2/backup/polgara# time rm -rf current.todel/
real1087m26.491s
user0m2.448s
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 10:15:07AM +0800, Liu Bo wrote:
On Mon, Mar 24, 2014 at 06:49:56PM -0700, Marc MERLIN wrote:
I had a tree with some amount of thousand files (less than 1 million)
on top of md raid5.
It took 18H to rm it in 3 tries:
gargamel:/mnt/dshelf2/backup/polgara# time rm
Oh, that's my fault, I forgot that iov can be chained.
I should use 'pos + count' instead.
Thanks for pointing it out.
Qu.
Original Message
Subject: [RFC] odd thing in btrfs_file_aio_write()
From: Al Viro v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk
To: Chris Mason c...@fb.com
Date: 2014年04月14日
When testing fsstress with snapshot making background, some snapshot
following problem.
Snapshot 270:
inode 323: size 0
Snapshot 271:
inode 323: size 349145
|---Hole---|-Empty gap---|---Hole-|
0 122880 172032349145
Snapshot 272:
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 10:35:08AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Oh, that's my fault, I forgot that iov can be chained.
I should use 'pos + count' instead.
BTW, will there be any difference if 10Mb write starts one byte before EOF?
IOW, is that if (start_pos i_size_read(inode)) { in there correct
Original Message
Subject: Re: [RFC] odd thing in btrfs_file_aio_write()
From: Al Viro v...@zeniv.linux.org.uk
To: Qu Wenruo quwen...@cn.fujitsu.com
Date: 2014年04月14日 10:48
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 10:35:08AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
Oh, that's my fault, I forgot that iov can be
On Mon, Apr 14, 2014 at 11:36:53AM +0800, Qu Wenruo wrote:
IOW, is that if (start_pos i_size_read(inode)) { in there correct
these days? And what'll happen if we hit e.g. an unmapped page in the
middle of the data being written? That will result in short write, but
will it truncate what's
21 matches
Mail list logo
